SonicosOperating system · Sonicwall

CVE-2020-5143

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-10-12
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 6.5.4.7 or later.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
SonicOS SSLVPN login page allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to perform firewall management administrator username enumeration based on the server responses. This vulnerability affected SonicOS Gen 5 version 5.9.1.7, 5.9.1.13, Gen 6 version 6.5.4.7, 6.5.1.12, 6.0.5.3, SonicOSv 6.5.4.v and Gen 7 version SonicOS 7.0.0.0.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

The SonicOS SSLVPN login page allows remote unauthenticated attackers to enumerate valid firewall management administrator usernames by observing differences in server responses. This information disclosure enables attackers to gather valid usernames for subsequent brute-force or credential stuffing attacks.

MitigationApply vendor patches for the affected SonicOS versions. If patches are unavailable, implement network-level access controls or rate limiting on the SSLVPN login endpoint to reduce enumeration attempts.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
SonicosOperating system
Affected:<= 5.9.1.13>= 6.0.0.0, <= 6.0.5.3>= 6.5.0.0, <= 6.5.1.11>= 6.5.4.0, <= 6.5.4.7= 7.0.0.0
SonicosvOperating system
Affected:<= 6.5.4.4

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify installed SonicOS version
    Log into the Sonicwall management interface and navigate to System > Status to view the firmware version, or use the command line and run 'show version' via SSH/console
    Affected if The version falls within any of these ranges: <= 5.9.1.13; >= 6.0.0.0 and <= 6.0.5.3; >= 6.5.0.0 and <= 6.5.1.11; >= 6.5.4.0 and <= 6.5.4.7; = 7.0.0.0 (for SonicOS) or <= 6.5.4.4 (for SonicOSv)
  2. Confirm SSLVPN is enabled
    Log into the Sonicwall management interface and navigate to VPN > SSL-VPN Settings to verify the SSLVPN service is enabled, or check via command line with 'show ssl-vpn config'
    Affected if SSLVPN is enabled and accessible from the network
  3. Check SSLVPN login endpoint exposure
    Attempt to access the SSLVPN login page externally (for example, via https://<firewall-ip>/ssl-vpn/login.html) from an untrusted network to confirm the endpoint is reachable
    Affected if The SSLVPN login page is reachable from untrusted networks without authentication
  4. Test for username enumeration response differences
    Send two HTTP POST requests to the SSLVPN login endpoint with different usernames (one known-valid, one random) and compare the server response codes, response times, or error messages
    Affected if The responses differ between valid and invalid usernames in a way that reveals whether an account exists

You are affected if your SonicOS version is in the affected list AND the SSLVPN login page is accessible, allowing an attacker to distinguish valid from invalid usernames via differing server responses.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 6.5.4.7
Interim mitigation

Apply vendor patches for the affected SonicOS versions. If patches are unavailable, implement network-level access controls or rate limiting on the SSLVPN login endpoint to reduce enumeration attempts.

Fix this in Sonicos Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-5143 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-5143 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data